IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

ACIT CEN CIR 13, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer pricing officer is directed to charge interest at the rate of labor+ 200 basis points. 098. Accordingly ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 099. Ground number 2 of the appeal is with respect to the allowability of deduction on empty containers sold of ₹ 1,027,691/– at Dehradun unit which is eligible for deduction

EVEREST INDUSTIRES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT RG 1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

iia) has been made clear by the third proviso inserted in sec. 32(1) by Finance Act 2015, we are unable to follow the view expressed by the Kolkatta 19 Everest Industries Limited bench of Tribunal in the case of Gloster Jute Mills (supra), which was in turn followed in the assessee’s own case. Since the decision rendered

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

32(1)(iia). 2.a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of 6,78,82,060/- (subject to certain rectification of apparent mistakes) made by the AO to the income of the Appellant by way of disallowing certain expenditure claimed to have been incurred

M/S GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI

iia), the ratio laid down in the above cases squarely applies\nto the facts of the instant case in the context of section 32AC.\n245. The AR of the assessee also contended that if a strict interpretation is\nadopted for the word \"and\" used in the term \"acquired and installed\", to\nunderstand it in its normal grammatical sense

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT - 10 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

32(1)(iia) was introduced into Act by the Finance Act, 2002 w.e.f. 01.04.2003 and it was introduced as an incentive for fresh investments in the industrial sector with a specific purpose / object of providing relief to tax payers to make investments in the new plant and machinery. In our humble opinion such provision has to be interpreted keeping

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. WELSPUN CORP LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee and appeal filed by the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

iia) of the Act and hence, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference from our side. Accordingly, the ground taken by the assessee is dismissed. 14. The next issue that came up for our consideration from ground No.3 of assessee appeal is disallowances of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee and appeal filed by the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

iia) of the Act and hence, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference from our side. Accordingly, the ground taken by the assessee is dismissed. 14. The next issue that came up for our consideration from ground No.3 of assessee appeal is disallowances of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income

ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

1)(iia) and not new in subsequent years. The expression "new machinery" is therefore to be construed as referring to the condition that at the time of acquisition or installation the machinery or plant should be new. Going by the legislative history of the relevant provision, we are of the view that the condition for allowing additional depreciation only

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

price whichever is lower, and it is now generally accepted as an established rule of commercial practice and accountancy. As profits for income-tax purposes are to be computed in conformity with the ordinary principles of commercial accounting, unless of course, such principles have been superseded or modified by legislative enactments unrealised profits in the shape of appreciated value

DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THIRVANTHAPURAM ROAD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

32. (1) In respect of depreciation of— (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, being tangible assets; (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ROAD DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD,ORRISSA vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

32. (1) In respect of depreciation of— (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, being tangible assets; (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes